What would all of the bull*****ers hating on Ricky Burns have said if...

[PityTheFool]

Originally Posted by dwighttsharpe

Last year he backed out of a scheduled HBO date.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

As recently as just a few months ago, around the time of the Mitchell fight, he said he wanted to face Broner, and it did not matter where.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Like I said, best just not say anything. Then you have to worry about being called out on it.

I'd like to go into this further Dwight since it's not often we get the chance to have a measured discussion,but I'm on my phone and long posts are a pain without the laptop.

Let's put this on the record;I'm not confident of Burns beating Broner, but I think he does better than DeMarco and more to the point, it's the fight I most want to see in boxing right now.
But I genuinely feel it's unfair to suggest that it's ok for Broner to say that,but Ricky would be lampooned for it.
It also seems to have incited a pile of new hatred for Ricky,who is the most genuine guy in British boxing,and he doesn't shit over other fighters.
If Ricky was American,he'd be the biggest white boxer in the country.Can you imagine the press he would get? Humble guy who shuns stardom,works in a sport shop every Saturday to stay grounded and drives a very modest car?
He'd be bigger than Pavlik.And it seems like he's becoming like K2 in that some fans are making him a hate figure.
I wish they'd at least try and look at him for what he is as a man.

[PityTheFool]

Originally Posted by jeffjoiner

I knew that didn't look right.

Pity, you're a solid poster and in many cases I think your point would be valid. In this case, though, I don't see a double standard.

For example, if Dirrell picked up a vacated belt and called out Froch, I'd say he needed to travel to the UK.

We'll agree to disagree then Jeff.But I think Ricky's as legitimate a champion at 135 as you'll get.His title resume is at least the equal of Vasquez and I freely admit Broner is the big name but I don't think Ricky should be viewed as a nonentity,which saying he'd be correctly slaughtered if he'd said it would suggest.

[jeffjoiner]

Originally Posted by PityTheFool

We'll agree to disagree then Jeff.But I think Ricky's as legitimate a champion at 135 as you'll get.His title resume is at least the equal of Vasquez and I freely admit Broner is the big name but I don't think Ricky should be viewed as a nonentity,which saying he'd be correctly slaughtered if he'd said it would suggest.

Keep in mind, that I'm speaking rather in general. From what little I've seen, Ricky looks decent. I'm confident Broner would take him, but he's not a pushover.

Americans do need to recognize that not all roads lead here anymore. In many cases, our champions do need to follow the money and champions. In those cases, I would be on your side.

[Slyk]

Originally Posted by PityTheFool

We'll agree to disagree then Jeff.But I think Ricky's as legitimate a champion at 135 as you'll get.His title resume is at least the equal of Vasquez and I freely admit Broner is the big name but I don't think Ricky should be viewed as a nonentity,which saying he'd be correctly slaughtered if he'd said it would suggest.

Can you name a conceivable advantage Burns has over Broner as far as who should travel?

Broner has the undefeated record, Burns has 2 losses to nobodies.

Broner lives in the capital of the boxing world, Burns doesn't.

Broner has big KO power at 84% KO rate, Burns is feather fisted at 27%.

Broner has the youth at 23, Burns is already 29 and hasn't done a whole lot.

Broner just moved up in weight and destroyed the #1 guy in the division to take the title, Burns has the...WBO title.

Broner has superstar potential, Burns seems destined for domestic level fights.

This thread is boring now.

[PityTheFool]

Originally Posted by Slyk

Can you name a conceivable advantage Burns has over Broner as far as who should travel?

Broner has the undefeated record, Burns has 2 losses to nobodies.

Broner lives in the capital of the boxing world, Burns doesn't.

Broner has big KO power at 84% KO rate, Burns is feather fisted at 27%.

Broner has the youth at 23, Burns is already 29 and hasn't done a whole lot.

Broner just moved up in weight and destroyed the #1 guy in the division to take the title, Burns has the...WBO title.

Broner has superstar potential, Burns seems destined for domestic level fights.

This thread is boring now.

Well you know where to go...
Has GBP made Burns an offer,decent or otherwise?
Is Cincinnati the new boxing capital of the world?
Should KO percentage matter in negotiations?
So Floyd is obviously going to have to start giving ground in negotiations?
I know you and I have had our moments Slyk,but I had come to think that you're trolling on K2 was just an aberration,and you had a bit more about you tha most of the bad minority of K2 fans...
But your last post indicates I was wrong
And it seems that the large number of people who have you down as a typical Klittard/ignorant bigot were right.
Ah well.Can't win em all.

[Slyk]

Originally Posted by PityTheFool

Well you know where to go...
Has GBP made Burns an offer,decent or otherwise?
Is Cincinnati the new boxing capital of the world?
Should KO percentage matter in negotiations?
So Floyd is obviously going to have to start giving ground in negotiations?
I know you and I have had our moments Slyk,but I had come to think that you're trolling on K2 was just an aberration,and you had a bit more about you tha most of the bad minority of K2 fans...
But your last post indicates I was wrong
And it seems that the large number of people who have you down as a typical Klittard/ignorant bigot were right.
Ah well.Can't win em all.

Insult me if you like. I, and many others in this thread have used logic to answer your question. You have refused to acknowledge said logic and reasoning and continue to stick to your broken point as if it were irrefutable. You have shown yourself to be uncompromising in the face of reason; you use childish and illogical retorts, and it really isn't worth continuing a discussion with you.

Don't make yourself out to be a poster looking for reasonable debate when you have concisely shown you are not capable of it.

Have a nice day

[PityTheFool]

Originally Posted by Slyk

Insult me if you like. I, and many others in this thread have used logic to answer your question. You have refused to acknowledge said logic and reasoning and continue to stick to your broken point as if it were irrefutable. You have shown yourself to be uncompromising in the face of reason; you use childish and illogical retorts, and it really isn't worth continuing a discussion with you.

Don't make yourself out to be a poster looking for reasonable debate when you have concisely shown you are not capable of it.

Have a nice day

Like I said, just because you've said it don't make it so.I've used perfectly reasonable retorts but because you don't agree then it's childish.You're the only one who keeps trying to argue yet I questioned your last post yet you seem unable to answer my questions.Then you try to dance round the houses with passive aggressiveness.
You only slate Burns because he's British.
And could you elaborate on the Cincinatti thing?
I'll catch you in the morning since you keep saying you're bored with the thread yet can't stay away.
Check out the other thread on the same subject then let me know how that worked with the "people agree so it must be true"
Toodle pip.You can have a free dig at me even though you're bored with the thread.

[Royal-T-Bag]

it's just the way it is in boxing unfortunately. If Broner was the UK fighter he'd have to come to the US. When was the last time a rising American star of Broners level and TV ratings went to fight a lower rated guy in England? I doubt it's ever happened. Broners pulling in bigger number then anyone who isn't Mayweather, Pac, Cotto, Chavez Jr or Canelo. He's one of the biggest attractions in the sport right now, plus he's an HBO fighter and they wouldn't even consider it being in the UK. Also Burns gets his biggest exposure by far and his biggest payday by coming to America so it really is in his best interest as well. It's how things are, not that I agree with it but Broners an HBO fighter and one of their biggest, it could never happen over there.

[lora]

Originally Posted by Hitta_Squadup

Ricky Burns? Seriously? All this bickering over Ricky fucking Burns? This dude has done zilch, Brits are always bitching about big name American fighters not wanting to fight in the UK, when so many UK fighters don't travel themselves, Burns has never fought outside the UK, it's all about the U.S. when it comes to boxing...

Put it this way, if British boxers were banned in America and vice versa, who do you think would lose out more? Sorry it's the UK, I wouldn't miss out on any current Brit who fights currently if they never fought again, but on the other hand if the UK couldn't get U.S. fights you guys would be missing out on dozens of great fighters who fight here on American soil...

America is where boxing reigns supreme, deal with it people...

Are you living in 1955 or something?

the vast majority of America doesn't give two fucks about boxing nowadays, and their own fighters aren't good enough in a large enough volume anymore to be content with staying at home, where they once had most of the best contenders in most of the divisions and could be assured they had faced most of the better comp without going abroad much.



Things need to be judged on a case by case basis with the way the sport is now and neither of these two are anywhere near the stage where they should be getting to dictate much.

A fight in America would be better for Burns imo, but they should be taking fights anywhere they can get them.

[assasin]

Originally Posted by Slyk

Can you name a conceivable advantage Burns has over Broner as far as who should travel?

Broner has the undefeated record, Burns has 2 losses to nobodies.

Broner lives in the capital of the boxing world, Burns doesn't.

Broner has big KO power at 84% KO rate, Burns is feather fisted at 27%.

Broner has the youth at 23, Burns is already 29 and hasn't done a whole lot.

Broner just moved up in weight and destroyed the #1 guy in the division to take the title, Burns has the...WBO title.

Broner has superstar potential, Burns seems destined for domestic level fights.

This thread is boring now.

i'm not going to make loads of posts on this subject as i know through experience that it's pointless... your post is evidence of that. others have talked the most embarrassing shit also...

a lot of people think that broner has two losses also. but what the fuck does having a couple of losses early in your career got to do with it? what a stupid thing to say.

what!!?? the capital? man, you're crazy! he doesn't live in the capital of boxing you dunce! get it out of your head you arrogant fool, that an international sport consists only in america.
the brits created the rules of boxing, the marquess of queensberry rules... does that mean we should be as grotesquely arrogant as you and claim that we are the whole world of boxing? of course not you fucking ego maniac.

holy shit! you lot become more and more embarrassing by the fucking day.

you're now using age!? why not go by the one who has more pubes on their dick? you are an imbecile of epic proportions.

broner didn't beat the NO.1 guy. burns is the NO.1. he has the more proven resume than anyone at lightweight. that is a fact!

superstar, based on american hype! before you go putting him on any P4P list, let him earn his stripes first. is burns a superstar? no. and he has a better resume than broner.

there you go again! domestic level? an aussie, a puerto rican, and someone from namibia, are domestic level?

you're a fucking insult to intelligence! an embarrassment!

people like you need to fuck off away from this site... maybe it wouldn't be a poison haven, then.

[MAJR]

Originally Posted by Royal-T-Bag

it's just the way it is in boxing unfortunately. If Broner was the UK fighter he'd have to come to the US. When was the last time a rising American star of Broners level and TV ratings went to fight a lower rated guy in England? I doubt it's ever happened. Broners pulling in bigger number then anyone who isn't Mayweather, Pac, Cotto, Chavez Jr or Canelo. He's one of the biggest attractions in the sport right now, plus he's an HBO fighter and they wouldn't even consider it being in the UK.

Jeff Lacy? I dont know what kind of money and ratings he was getting before Cazlaghe ruined him but he was one of America's brightest prospects, and a HBO fighter, so he must have been pulling some big rating and cash in his day, and Calzaghe was thought to be shot and never much of a fighter anyway by most of the pundits, so it could be argued that Calzaghe was rated lower than Lacy heading into their fight.

[knockout artist]

For me it's not the issue of travelling, I think Ricky should take his big chance and go to Vegas. My issue, is that if Burns beats Broner, the Americans will refuse to give him any credit for it

[Collie]

Originally Posted by oibighead

This forum is full of double standards

Originally Posted by PityTheFool

It was Ricky who said he wouldn't fight Broner in the States?

Not once have I bad mouthed Broner,apart from when I said if he fought Duran in a fantasy rematch,Cholo would scalp him and brush the hair in his hands whilst doing the interview with Larry after the fight.

I rate Broner very highly,and just like the added weight helped Ricky,it looks as if Broner is getting even more benefit.

Why the hate for Ricky and again,what would you all have said if the shoe was on the other foot?

It's a big rancid stinking double standard and you all know it.

[SJS19]

Broner will have a problem with Burns.

I don't think he'll lose, but he'll learn a hell of a lot from this fight simply because he'd be forced to.

Broner does his Mayweather imitation, but it's a 35 year old Floyd he imitates. His feet are a little too flat for a Lightweight with his physical ability and potential. Burns is under-rated in terms of skills, his jab will have success and so will his right hand once he starts to feint. Doesn't matter how quick a Boxer is, they'll fall for feints. Cotto vs Mayweather is a wonderful example of that.

Broner should beat Burns, but anybody seeing it as a cake walk is deluded.

[PityTheFool]

Originally Posted by SJS19

Broner will have a problem with Burns.

I don't think he'll lose, but he'll learn a hell of a lot from this fight simply because he'd be forced to.

Broner does his Mayweather imitation, but it's a 35 year old Floyd he imitates. His feet are a little too flat for a Lightweight with his physical ability and potential. Burns is under-rated in terms of skills, his jab will have success and so will his right hand once he starts to feint. Doesn't matter how quick a Boxer is, they'll fall for feints. Cotto vs Mayweather is a wonderful example of that.

Broner should beat Burns, but anybody seeing it as a cake walk is deluded.

Funny that it's taken this long for someone to actually break down a potential match.
All we hear is how Broner will "smoke" Burns so nice to see a post that covers the actual fight.